[Leica] Re: Replacing 75 and 135 with a 90

["Mike Quinn" <mlquinn@san.rr.com>]

Nathan,

I agree with everything you said EXCEPT that the 90 is similar to the 135.
The 90 is my favorite focal length. I still carry (and use) the 135.
When I think about it, 90 seems close to 135. But they don't seem close when
I use them.
Like Mark I find myself switching back and forth between 90 and 135.
I guess I find the 40-90-135 range very pleasing.
You can substitute a 35 or 50 for the 40 and (probably) the 75 for the 90,
but the 90 doesn't replace the 135.
Of course, if you can only have two, then the 135 is doomed...

Best of luck,
Hope you won't be disappointed,

Mike Quinn

- ----------

> Date: Sat, 31 Jul 1999 08:47:21 +0200
Nathan Wajsman wrote:
>
> Hi Mark,
> In principle, I agree that the lenses all have different characteristics
> (as pointed out by
> Erwin) and ideally one should keep them all. However, as I said before,
> there are two factors
> behind my decision to replace the 75 and 135 with a 90: (1) the weight of
> my gadget bag; (2) I am
> not independently wealthy and so have decided that going forward my new M
> purchases are to be
> financed by selling off other M equipment so as to keep the amount invested
> at any given time
> more or less constant. From a focal length point of view, the 90 is not
> THAT different from a 75
> or a 135--in most cases, I can use my legs to achieve the desired framing.
>
> You are right, I am an intensive "shooter", at least for an amateur, and
> all my equipment
> purchases are made with that in mind. In the end, this is an individual
> decision, which may be
> right for me but not for someone else.
>
> As far as carrying both M and R systems around: my R system is primarily
> dedicated to photography
> which is not easily accomplished with rangefinder cameras, and my lens
> choices reflect this.
> Besides the 50mm Summicron that my SL came with, I have purchased the 60mm
> macro Elmarit, because
> I have always enjoyed close-ups of flowers etc., and the 180mm Elmarit for
> the longer stuff. I
> plan to add a really long lens in the future, such as the 6.8/400mm Telyt
> (check out Doug Herr's
> pictures to see what can be done with this lens!); I also lust for the 28mm
> shift lens. For me,
> the R system is for specialized use, and I take it with me only when I know
> that I will doing
> that kind of photography. If I am just going on a trip or walking around
> town, then the R bag
> stays at home. The M bag is always in the car when I go somewhere, the R
> bag only when I go
> somewhere with the specific intent to photograph certain things.
>
> Nathan
>
> Mark Rabiner wrote:
>
>> That's why I think you need to hold on to that 135! Yes the 90APOASPH
> will equal or
>> better it's performance slightly I think but a 90 is not a 135. I've felt the
>> same often feeling I have to bring everything with the one thing at home
being
>> the one thing that I seem to always need. But do you always bring your R
system
>> along too?
>> I've had some definite experience in the M system bringing everything with
doing
>> a lot of changing in between the 90 and the 135 because one was decidedly
>> preferred over the other at a certain time. They are not both "close" or
> the same.
>> Yes I am obviously being presumptuous with your very personal needs but you
>> sound like an intensive "shooter" and I'd hate to see you loose out. No
offence
>> given or taken, just presumption.
>> Mark Rabiner